Isn't this forum "Ski Technique and Analysis"?
So isn't it appropriate to discuss how a concept effects technique?
Originally Posted by g-force
Look at these world cup dudes free skiing. They are not attack- ing or will- ing. They are just free skiing.
They HAVE projection,inclination and steep edge angles that produce juice in phases 1,2,3 and pole-plants and timing for these ITEMS.
We may describe it as attack if, in a race-course, they cut off the line and take a straighter line.
Well, I'd say they're not just free skiing, they are making very intentional turns. I'd say if they really were just free skiing there would be a lot more....uh...attacking
! I think they probably really like to go for it in their free skiing, no? Somehow I don't see them as "park and ride" skiers!
In terms of this discussion though, in that video above, they are attacking - just not at the level we're used to seeing, esp. when they are dressed to go. Certainly they are excercising Will
to create the turns they want.
Will and attack are attitudes. They are merely language, barely poetic, and do not have a place in technical discussions....
I thought this was a technical discussion about "attack".
You're certainly right about them existing in language. Saying they are merely
language though disregards the power of language. Watch any sports show, you will hear about "team", "desire", "will" etc. So even when players are paid millions of dollars and already have exceptional skills, we consider these "barely poetic" terms important enough to talk about.
Will and attack are merely hyped, inaccurately described RE-BRANDED technical parts present in a turn and this 'artisitck' stuff is not a technical desription...
(Is that an artistic spelling or a typo?
We could say that you have the tail wagging the dog here. The technical parts present in a turn exist because of
the "merely hyped" "artistic" concepts or terms, "Will" and "attack". The dog is "will" and "attack", the tail is the technical parts. Maybe even more accurately, "will" creates the dog and the tail.
David Ortiz, Red Sox DH, had a terrible slump for probably the first half of this year. He got a gazillion tips, analyses, etc. to solve this. None of it worked apparently. Somehow he got himself out of it, by "just having fun" like when he "played in little league". Now, that's hardly technical, yet if you did an in depth analysis you might find the technical effects of that "artistic" way of being that changed his game and got him hitting home runs again.
Note: I could also "explain" his slump by saying this is what happens when someone burys a David Ortiz jersey in concrete when they were building the new Yankee Stadium. They found out about it and jack-hammered it out - lucky for him or he'd have a permanent slump. Of course, maybe that's why so many home runs were hit at the new Yankee Stadium....